Linked by Anton Klotz on Thu 18th Jan 2007 18:16 UTC
This article tries to explain why workstations are no longer an appropriate tool for the present working environment, what the alternatives are, and what consequences it has for the development of OSes.
Thread beginning with comment 203154
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Flogging a stillborn horse
by arielb on Thu 18th Jan 2007 19:34
in reply to "Flogging a stillborn horse"
Member since:2006-11-15
RE[2]: Flogging a stillborn horse
by twenex on Thu 18th Jan 2007 21:45
in reply to "RE: Flogging a stillborn horse"
Member since:2006-04-21
SGI is pretty much dead. anything else wasn't really a "workstation" but merely a unix pc.
Well, SCO boxes were "Unix PC's". Compare the state of Sun, DEC, DG, HP and IBM hardware in the 90s, and the software that was run on them, with the equivalent Amiga/Mac/PC offerings and I think you will agree HP, DEC, Sun, DG and IBM Unix boxen were "workstations" at the time.
And of course IBM and Sun Unix workstations are still around, as are HP-UX boxen if anyone wants them.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-04-21
People have been saying workstations are dead since X-terminals came out. People have also been saying Unix is dead since about V4. Neither has happened. Although some find such things as the Linux Terminal Server Project useful (and more power to them if they do), it would be more accurate to say that X-terminals are dead.
When will people stop flogging this stillborn horse? At this rate there'll be another round of media-excitement over dot-coms (the ones that crashed and burned in the late 90's, even).